Pillar v. Runkel, Rowley & Co.
77 N.W. 1118, 11 S.D. 337, 1898 S.D. LEXIS 134
Opinion
As the record now before us presents questions of law and fact identical with.the case of Chaffee v. This Defendant, 11 S. D. 333, 77 N. W. 583, an opinion would be but a needless repetition. Controlled by the conclusion there reached, the order overruling a motion to discharge the attachment is affirmed. 1
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Pillar v. Runkel, Rowley & Co., 77 N.W. 1118, 11 S.D. 337, 1898 S.D. LEXIS 134 (S.D. 1898).
77 N.W. 1118 (Pillar v. Runkel, Rowley & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Chaffee v. Runkel, Rowley & Co.
77 N.W. 583 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1898)